Is DNA Really Definite?
The Use, Limitations, and Ethics of DNA Evidence
Marieli Medina, Ellie Satre, and Mason Wendel
Eng-211 Prof. Joe Betz
Why Does It Matter?
DNA evidence has become one of the most significant advancements in
modern forensic science, but many people mistakenly believe it is flawless.
In reality, contamination, human error, improper interpretation, and
ethical concerns can undermine its reliability and impact the pursuit of
justice (Jones & Chakravarti, 2023; Saad, 2005).
Because of this, it is vital to implement:
- Improved laboratory procedures
- Stronger and fairer policies for DNA collection and privacy
- Better education for investigative professionals, legal professionals
and juries
What’s Wrong Now?
Currently, there are many concerns regarding current policies and
procedures surrounding the collecting, storage, and handling of DNA
evidence.
- Laboratory errors from contamination, mislabeled evidence, or
incorrect analyses can result in people being convicted of crimes they
did not commit (National Institute of Justice, 2024).
- Personal DNA profiles are being created and stored in databases of
people who haven’t been convicted, and getting this data expunged is
very difficult (Segura, 2012; Wallace et al., 2024).
- Legal professionals and those determining the verdict in court
proceedings don’t fully understand the forensic evidence being
presented to them (Singh, 2011).
Figure 1.
This figure illustrates the relationship between forensic science and other contributing factors in wrongful convictions. It shows
that eyewitness misidentification and official misconduct are among the most common contributing factors, while forensic science
alone is rarely the sole case.
Note. From Figure 2. The relationship between forensic science and other contributing factors in erroneous convictions [Graph], by the
National Institute of Justice, 2017
([Link] In the public domain.
Solution Proposal 1
Standard laboratory quality-control procedures must be improved to
reduce the risk of contamination and mishandling.
This can be done through:
- More frequent proficiency testing of individuals
- Mandatory peer review of complex DNA analyses
- Enhanced contamination procedures
- Routine equipment calibration and maintenance
While these procedures increase operating cost and require giving
additional training, the improved quality assurance would reduce wrongful
convictions and strengthen the overall credibility of forensic evidence
(National Institute of Justice, 2024).
The use of nullomer markers (a non-biological DNA tag) on evidence is an emerging technology
that could be used reduce contamination (TEDx Talks, 2015).
As shown in Figure 2, nullomer tagging provides an additional safeguard against DNA
contamination by allowing contaminated samples be detected before they are used as evidence
in court. This process helps improve the accuracy and reliability of forensic DNA analysis.
Note. Own work
Solution Proposal 2
DNA collection policies must be made to better balance crime prevention
with individual privacy rights.
Reforms could include
- Automatically removing DNA profiles after dismissed /acquitted
charges
- Creating a simpler process for DNA record expungement
- Establishing clearer and stronger limitations on collected DNA from
individuals who have not been convicted of a crime
- Increasing transparency regarding how DNA information is being
stored and used
While the establishment of these reforms would take time, they would
protect civil liberties of the public while maintaining the use of DNA
databases (Nogel, 2026; National Conference of State Legislature, 2025).
Solution Proposal 3
Expansion of education for legal professionals should be made a greater
priority.
Prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges, investigators, and other criminal
justice professionals would benefit from additional training on the
capabilities and limitations of forensic DNA evidence.
While this would require more work for legal professionals, improving
scientific literacy would ensure that these limitations are communicated to
jurors, and that DNA evidence is being interpreted accurately so that a
more informed judicial decision can be made (Singh, 2011; Jones and
Chakravarti, 2023).
Although these solutions would require
extra time and funding, the long-term
benefits outweigh the initial costs and
would help minimize wrongful
convictions while maintaining public
trust in the criminal justice system.
References
National Conference of State Legislatures. (2025). DNA collection after arrest laws.
[Link]
Jones, S. (Host), & Chakravarti, D. (Host). (2023, December 13). The history of a monumental forensic tool and
the ethical debate sparked by wrongful convictions based on trace DNA evidence [Audio podcast
episode]. In Tiny Matters. American Chemical Society.
[Link]
ml
National Institute of Justice. (2017, September 7). Figure 2. The relationship between forensic science and other
contributing factors in erroneous convictions [Graph].
[Link]
c-science
National Institute of Justice. (2024). The impact of false or misleading forensic evidence on wrongful
convictions.
[Link]
Nogel, M. (2026). Toward a European standard for elimination DNA databases: Policy recommendations for
harmonized minimum requirements. Forensic Science International: Synergy, 13, 100709.
[Link]
References Cont.
Saad, R. (2005). Discovery, development, and current applications of DNA identity testing. Proceedings
(Baylor University. Medical Center), 18(2), 130–133. [Link]
Segura, L. (2012). Fighting crime with DNA samples comes with great risks. In S. Kiesbye (Ed.), At Issue. DNA
Databases. Greenhaven Press. (Reprinted from Albany's DNA Expansion: A Foolproof Solution?,
Brooklyn Rail, 2010, July)
[Link]
kmark-OVIC&xid=57620b42
Singh, S. C. (2011). DNA profiling and the forensic use of DNA evidence in criminal proceedings. Journal of
the Indian Law Institute, 53(2), 195–226. [Link]
TEDx Talks. (2015, June 4). Forensic DNA mixups | Greg Hampikian | TEDxBoise [Video]. YouTube.
[Link]
Wallace, H. M., Jackson, A. R., Gruber, J., & Thibedeau, A. D. (2014). Forensic DNA databases: Ethical and
legal standards: A global review. Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 4(3), 57–63.
[Link]